Informing the Community
To clear the path towards his inappropriate salary increase, Mayor Koch’s administration enlisted a report from a financial analysis firm, Dorminson Consulting. This firm’s analysis makes a recommendation which would make the Quincy Mayor the highest paid mayor in the nation. Their logic is based on comparing the mayor to town manager/administrators rather than 1400 mayors across the country. The case for the mayor’s ridiculous raise is based on fallacious logic, inconsistent analysis, and plain old hackery.
Here is a breakdown of the various arguments in favor of the raise and the opposing viewpoint.
Talking point #1: The mayor of Quincy is more like a city manager or town administrator. He is the Chief Executive Officer of the city.
The main rationale in the Dorminson Report is as follows: ‘The slight variations in role specifics between a CAO and a Mayor are outweighed by the advantages of having a more comprehensive dataset. Utilizing the CAO designation allows for the inclusion of a broader array of executive roles across different municipalities and public sector organizations, which is crucial for conducting a robust comparative analysis.’ A problem with this strategy is that there is no shortage of data that would necessitate an apples-to-oranges comparison. There are thousands of mayors in the country. A more useful exercise would have been to identify cities with a population of approximately 100,000, a strong mayor government, and challenges and features similar to Quincy, and then compare those salaries. One can only speculate that the reason Dorminson did not adopt this approach is because it would not yield the results their client, the Quincy Finance Office, desired.
Dorminson overlooks the crucial differences between town managers/administrators and mayors:
Town administrators are hired, can be fired, and are accountable to a municipal body such as a town council, board of selectmen, alderman, etc. For instance, Quincy has experienced its share of scandals in recent years, the most recent involving a long-term employee under investigation for misappropriation of federal funding. A town administrator could have easily been on the chopping block for not detecting such long-term corruption.
Town administrators need to steer clear of political issues, whereas the mayor’s office is inherently political. Mayors often spend a significant portion of their time promoting their political brand and preparing for their next election
Talking Point #2: The Mayor of Quincy has a job that requires availability 24/7, 365 days a year, with no vacation or sick time.
With this point, those advocating for the significant raise are conflating availability with work. For better or worse, there is a shift in modern work culture towards a 24/7 ethos. Whether or not the current Mayor of Quincy maintains a proper work/life balance is a personal issue. There are no jobs that require work 24/7, 365 days a year. It’s not possible for humans to do so due to limitations…like the need for sleep. The Mayor does not perform the types of functions that are done 24 hours a day. If a water main breaks overnight, it’s possible the Mayor is made aware, but he is not wading through flooded streets in the middle of the night. Like so many of us, he has a job that calls for availability at all hours.
(And the mayor gets benefits and leave just like any other employee.)
Talking point #3: The only people who aren’t for this salary increase are people who don’t support the mayor.
Among the most disrespectful arguments presented by our disappointing city council is the claim that those opposed to this raise simply did not support the mayor in the last election and do not support him generally. Firstly, Councilors Ash and Devine likely did not inquire about their constituents’ voting history, and it's improbable that many constituents volunteered such irrelevant information. They are making assumptions and, worse, dismissing their constituents' concerns by attributing them to bias and reducing these individuals to mere detractors. If there is an overlap in the Venn diagram between voters who did not support Mayor Koch and citizens who oppose this ordinance, it probably reflects deeper differences in their perspectives on governance and civic priorities.
Talking point #4: A buffet of inconsistent and fallacious reasoning.
4.A: When it is pointed out that this raise puts the Quincy mayoral salary at #3 in the country, despite the city being the 320th most populous city in the United States, supporters say that it’s not about the size of the city but the responsibilities of the mayor as chief executive. So when looking at the long list of town managers the Dorminson folks compiled, the average salary of those positions, which Dorminson, the Mayor and the City Council feel is the better comparison, is $169,000. When this is pointed out, the response is “Yes, but look at the size of those towns.” So, in summary, size matters when it helps justify a 79% increase in pay, and it doesn’t matter when an apples-to-apples or mayor to mayor comparison suggests this raise is cuckoo for cocoa puffs.
4.B: Proponents of this bill often point out that Quincy’s mayoral salary has not been raised in 9 or 10 years. Setting aside the fact that the current mayor has been in office since 2008 and was in charge of proposing raises during that time, the salary figure the mayor is proposing is far, FAR above what it would be if a common 3% cost-of-living increase had been applied every year since the last raise. If we take the mayoral salary of 2014 and multiply it by 3% each year, the new salary figure would be:
<Drumroll>
2014 $150,000.00 x 1.03% = $154,500.00
2015 $154,500.00 x 1.03% = $159,135.00 etc
2016 $159,135.00 x 1.03%
2017 $163,909.05 x 1.03%
2018 $168,826.32 x 1.03%
2019 $173,891.11 x 1.03%
2020 $179,107.84 x 1.03%
2021 $184,481.08 x 1.03%
2022 $190,015.51 x 1.03%
2023 $195,715.98 x 1.03% =$201,587.46
2024 $201,587.46*
*This also assumes a 3% increase each year, a consistency city workers and teachers did not enjoy.
4.C We need to increase the salary to attract good candidates!
Those who are supporting this ordinance are convinced that we will not get good candidates without a tremendously high salary figure. They seem to have forgotten why people go into public service and run for elected office. Elected office is not meant to be a path to personal financial prosperity or a long-term career. As an example, the President of the United States’ salary is far below what could be commanded if the job were priced on the commercial market.
It is unfortunate that there has been a trend towards “mayor for life” in Quincy and in other parts of the country. Again, the mayors are not hired, they are elected. Our system is meant to have fresh ideas and energy come into elected office and then make way for new people with new vision.
For some who would run, the mayoral salary would be more than what they are used to making, for some it would be a bit of a paycut. While the councilors are worried about getting qualified mayoral candidates, none seem concerned that a mayor could hang around too long for the meaty salary.
In fact, studies seem to support this concern. According to a study from Columbia University, Princeton University, University of Chicago, DONG Energy, “… higher salaries also increase the fraction of incumbents who choose to stand for reelection, thus increasing the average tenure of politicians. In contrast to these selection effects, monetary incentives have no discernible impact on politicians’ effort, which seems more influenced by non-pecuniary motivations.”
In a rational market, it would make sense to pay politicians more. Doing so would generate increased competition between candidates, attract better applicants, and secure better politicians. But politicians—not market forces—are responsible for setting their own salary levels, one reason why the political labor market veers toward irrationality.
~Kate Ancell, Chicago Booth Review